The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax -Central -1 v. Ashok Kumar Singh
High Court
14 Dec 2023 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · dhcdb
Parties
The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax -Central -1 v. Ashok Kumar Singh
Date of order
14 Dec 2023
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax -Central -1 v. Ashok Kumar Singh, the High Court (2023) decided the matter.
Decision: The said order of the CIT(A) has been sustained by the Tribunal viathe impugned order.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
$~31
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Decision delivered on: 14.12.2023
+ ITA 762/2023
THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -CENTRAL -1
..... Appellant Through: Mr Ruchir Bhatia, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr Pratyakash Gupta, Standing Counsel.
versus
ASHOK KUMAR SINGH
Through: None.
..... Respondent
CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHERHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIAO R D E R14.12.2023
[Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)]
RAJIV SHAKDHER, J. (ORAL):
CM APPL. 64808/2023 [Application filed on behalf of the appellant/revenue seeking condonation of delay in re-filing the appeal]
1. This is an application seeking condonation of delay in re-filing the appeal on behalf of the appellant/revenue. appeal on behalf of the appellant/revenue.
2. Having regard to the period involved the delay in condoned. The application is disposed of. application is disposed of.
ITA 762/2023
3. This appeal concerns Assessment Year 2013-14.
4. Via the instant appeal the appellant/revenue seeks to assail the order dated 19.04.2023 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [in short dated 19.04.2023 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [in short
„Tribunal‟].
5. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short, “CIT(A)”] vide order dated 23.08.2021 deleted the addition made by the Assessing Officer (AO), albeit on protective basis, amounting to Rs. 2,43,11,824/- on the ground that a substantive addition was being made against the company in which the respondent/assessee was a director and a sole shareholder, i.e., Everbez Business Inc. [in short „Everbez‟]. The record shows that Everbez was being proceeded under the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015 [in short „2015 Act‟].
6. The said order of the CIT(A) has been sustained by the Tribunal viathe impugned order.
7. Mr Ruchir Bhatia, learned senior standing counsel states that the best way forward would be to close the instant appeal, with liberty to the appellant/revenue to approach the Court, in case the appellant/revenue were to fail in the proceedings taken out against the respondent/assessee, concerning Everbez under the 2015 Act.
8. We tend to agree with Mr Bhatia. Accordingly, the appeal is closed with liberty as prayed for.
9. The registry will dispatch a copy of the order to the respondent/assessee via all modes, including email. The appellant/revenue will also ensure that a copy of this order is served on the respondent/assessee.
RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.
DECEMBER 14, 2023/rk
GIRISH KATHPALIA, J.
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.